Where The Newspaper Stands

July 08, 2007

An ugly tale

How we came to be saddled with the new traffic fees

The assorted defenses of Virginia's new traffic "abuser fees" may be more illustrative -- and, in their own singular way, more aggravating -- that the original enactment of this particular legislation.

The most common refrain heard in recent days, advanced by Gov. Tim Kaine, Speaker Bill Howell and the law's principal legislative advocate, Fairfax Del. David Albo, asserts that the new fees will affect only the worst of the worst drivers, a teeny-weenie fraction of the total traveling public.

But the logic of the law does not support such a benign conclusion. Legislators enacted this law to raise money -- and you raise more money with broader and more aggressive enforcement of the law.

Proponents held up traffic safety as a supposed benefit -- a selling point, you know -- but no one doubted for a moment that "abuser fees" were about turning law enforcement officers into revenue agents.

Will the public's negative reaction to abuser fees dampen enthusiasm for enforcement?

Don't count on it. The law is the law. Until the General Assembly steps back in and alters the draconian provisions of this measure -- The New York Times reported on Tuesday that "Virginia has arguably become the worst place in the country to commit a serious traffic violation" -- drivers may wish to favor prudence.

Of course, if that's the result, then the safety argument becomes more persuasive. Only, as drivers commit fewer infractions, the anticipated revenue -- that's the money the state has built into its road budget -- will decline, undermining the original purpose of the bill and leaving fewer bucks to improve roads.

Entertaining, yes?

Try this on for size: Add up the latest changes and you realize that state legislators have truly done something special for our area. The abuser fees apply only to Virginians, and the new local taxes, fees, etc. -- demanded by state legislators as part of a new regional transportation authority -- apply only to Virginians who happen to live in 12 jurisdictions of Hampton Roads (and gas-buying visitors who are passing through).

Lucky us, twice over.

Speaker Bill Howell insists that everyone knew the abuser fees were coming, that the legislation claimed "widespread bipartisan support" and that "these fees have a proven track record of increasing road safety and supplementing transportation revenues."

Wait a minute. The abuser fees were kicked around in Richmond in 2006 and defeated. Then came the November election, the defeat of GOP incumbent U.S. Sen. George Allen and the takeover of Congress by the Democratic Party.

That stirred fear among Virginia Republicans that, come the 2007 legislature, obstructionism would no longer fly as a political position on transportation improvements. They couldn't just continue to say "no." That would only play to the advantage of Gov. Kaine and his legislative allies, Attorney General Bob McDonnell insisted to his party's legislative leaders.

But no one in the Republican ranks wanted to give up their general opposition to new state taxes, including hikes in the statewide gas tax, a position rigidly adhered to since George Allen first occupied the Governor's Mansion in 1994.

What to do, then? How do you build state roads without new state money? Borrow. Delay. Borrow some more. Talk up innovation. Borrow. Or, when the demand for new road money gets unavoidable, you dodge and force local government officials to do the dirty work.

The abuser fees blossomed in 2007 as a political scheme to avoid direct taxation -- a choice that now has the potential of hurting average people more than any tax might.

It's been said before, but it seems lately to be said by ordinary citizens at every turn. All these new, ramped-up fees and sideways taxes are the annoying result of a legislature that twisted itself in knots to avoid doing the obvious: raise road-building monies -- raise the statewide gas tax.